MrMistery, keep in mind it is more than just radiocarbon dating that helps determine the age of a book. Another helpful source is looking for references to it in other texts. For example, an alien civilization might date your Bible to 1995, but if they found a text that referenced the Bible and dated that one to 1500, they'd know the Bible was at least five hundred years older than their copy. It's those two forms of evidences together that help establish the estimated age for many ancient texts. It's still possible for a book to be older, but without any evidence, it wouldn't be good science to stake your faith on it.

Roan, it is a mistake to write off religion as merely a substitute for science. Indeed neither can substitute for the other; science explains the natural, religion the supernatural. There is no overlap between the two and it is a mistake to assume that they must therefor be in opposition to each other.

Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

Well alex here are my thoughts.every foreign book someone could find on the market in this country 25 years ago was about Russia, China or North Korea. The western world was that bad place nobody needed to know anything about. So I can safely say that it is possible for something that is not "correct" to appear as inexistent. And it is clear to me that the church deemed the gnostic gospels as "incorrect" and therefore it would not be a surprise if those gospels were older but the references to them were simply destroyed.Sounds like a conspiracy theory, but I think nobody doubts the church is capable of anything..

"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter

A conspiracy of that magnitude requires near-absolute power, something the Church has never really had. Indeed, many of the Church's most embarrassing moments were the direct result of its inability to resist secular powers who sought to manipulate it to their own benefit. Examples of this include the Schism of 1068, the Avignon Papacy, and the Spanish Inquisition. So I doubt that it was possible for such a conspiracy to take place, and as I said before, without evidence your theory is weak at best.

Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

You talked about the things that the Church could do for the sake of the benefits that the people there may get; power and wealth are good reasons definitely. I see here that the purpose of the Church is poorly reflected.

---Just one act of random kindness at a time and you can change the world---

Evidently, Bile is written by human beings themselves but not God. Conversely, God is also created by human beings. So God is not perfect because of the narrow ideas of our ancient. If we design a God today, I think it will be more perfect and less paradoxical than before.

“Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere.”Carl Sagan“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.” Richard Dawkins

tianlai wrote:Evidently, Bile is written by human beings themselves but not God. Conversely, God is also created by human beings. So God is not perfect because of the narrow ideas of our ancient. If we design a God today, I think it will be more perfect and less paradoxical than before.

Generally speaking, people today are much more narrow-minded than they were in the past; this post could be taken as an example.

Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

tianlai wrote:Evidently, Bile is written by human beings themselves but not God. Conversely, God is also created by human beings. So God is not perfect because of the narrow ideas of our ancient. If we design a God today, I think it will be more perfect and less paradoxical than before.

Generally speaking, people today are much more narrow-minded than they were in the past; this post could be taken as an example.

I doubt your affirmation alex, people were and still are quite narrow minded. Many cultures considered racism, religious intolerance, sexual discrimination and other such behaviours are perfectly acceptable. And there is still quite a lot of work to get rid of it. As a result "modern" religions are not better (take the Church of Scientology) than the older one... One could say that just as the old one they are a mean of power and exclusion (of the non believers) just as they often were although some of the old religion have gone away from this and have become much less inocuous and tolerant.

Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

tianlai wrote:Evidently, Bile is written by human beings themselves but not God. Conversely, God is also created by human beings. So God is not perfect because of the narrow ideas of our ancient. If we design a God today, I think it will be more perfect and less paradoxical than before.

Generally speaking, people today are much more narrow-minded than they were in the past; this post could be taken as an example.

Obviously, I must confirm that you are a skeptic as well as me. If you are, I think we have different definitions in narrow-minded. Your definition more likes prejudice, and my opinion is about rationality of design. For example, as the omnipotent God can't predict the sins that are made by humans from Adam to his descendants and stop the sins before them occurs. Why does the omnipotent God design the heathens? Why doesn't the omnipotent God teach ancient people to use computer and CD-RW Rom that can hardly be falsified and misunderstood comparing with parchment recording Bible?

“Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere.”Carl Sagan“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.” Richard Dawkins

tianlai wrote:Evidently, Bile is written by human beings themselves but not God. Conversely, God is also created by human beings. So God is not perfect because of the narrow ideas of our ancient. If we design a God today, I think it will be more perfect and less paradoxical than before.

The scriptures can't be broken. The people long time ago had wrote God's words because they encountered Him, God had worked in their lives. I know for sure that you have heard of God's words at the same time (and if you are a Christian) and so do I. Now we must do the same, by letting others hear the words if ever they haven't known of it yet.

---Just one act of random kindness at a time and you can change the world---

The key is how to prove these words really came from God but not Human. If the scriptures can't be broken, why do so many different versions exist? How to identify these scriptures fiction or fact? I'm sure the result of identification being disappointed. It is so lucky that I am a skeptic but not a Christian. I trust the civilization should be more advanced without the interference of religion.

“Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere.”Carl Sagan“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.” Richard Dawkins

@Canalon:You make a good point, and I would agree with you that people in general are narrow-minded. Perhaps I stated myself poorly but I meant to illustrate that just because people today pretend to be more "tolerant" than we were in the past doesn't mean we are any less narrow-minded, and it is a form of foolish arrogance to believe that we are somehow superior to our ancestors when the fact remains that we haven't done much better than they did at solving the world's many problems.

@tianlai:I suppose some would consider me a skeptic though I do not usually like to attach labels to myself. I mean no offense but I would caution you against your own narrow-mindedness as you seem to expect an omnipotent God to automatically use 21st century technology. Indeed if God is truly omnipotent then even today's modern technology must be childishly simple compared to His power, and had He so chosen He could have easily provided for the Bible to remain unaltered even in parchment form, most likely using techniques that are quite beyond our ability to understand or even detect. Of course I'm not necessarily saying that this had to happen, but it would certainly be possible for an omnipotent deity to do, and an open-minded skeptic should consider all the possibilities. To say that God is flawed because He doesn't play by our 21st century rules is foolish in the extreme.

Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

Science needs proof. So today' theory would be replaced by another new theory. Wrong point of view will be corrected by new evidence. Do any proofs support God's exist? I just prove this world without any Gods.

“Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere.”Carl Sagan“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.” Richard Dawkins